Free Republic 2nd Quarter Fundraising Target: $85,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $19,571
23%  
Woo hoo!! And the first 23% is in!! Thank you all very much!!

Posts by BearArms

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Do Americans Trust in God?

    01/01/2014 11:37:21 PM PST · 23 of 23
    BearArms to cornelis
    In politics today, half of the American people are not trusting reason. This administration is probably the most unreasonable administration ever. Half of the population prefers it that way.

    Half the population has values fairly consistent with those of the Obama administration. Many of its policies are "unreasonable," yes. However, no election is ever a straight choice between reason and irrationality. People tend to vote for candidates who possess values closest to theirs, and so we have president Obama. I found George W. Bush's spending orgies to be exceptionally unreasonable, so I hope you're not implying that voting Republican is always the reasonable course.

    Reason is not what separates. What separates is a preference for the body over the soul and an temporal life over an eternal life. You think the ancients didn't trust in reason.

    What separates is credulousness versus evidence based belief. Some ancients did trust in reason...far more trusted in superstition. These days, superstition has a far tougher time of it. I expect it will get tougher.

    Sorry. You stepped in it.

    I don't think so. You might be smelling something on your end.

  • Do Americans Trust in God?

    12/31/2013 3:13:53 PM PST · 20 of 23
    BearArms to cornelis
    "Wrong."

    LOL...I love it when people do that. Have a great new year!

  • Do Americans Trust in God?

    12/31/2013 2:58:56 PM PST · 18 of 23
    BearArms to Kaslin
    I think Americans are increasingly trusting in reason. With the internet, people can now weigh religious claims much more efficiently than ever before. They can examine Christianity (its theological statements, its purported miracles, etc) and compare it to other religions, like Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, or what have you.

    They can look at the evidence for each and decide if there are good reasons to choose one faith over the others. They can debate those with different cultural and philosophical perspectives and see if, by putting on someone else's shoes, they can better understand why others come to very different conclusions about religion and God(s).

    It seems to me, if Christianity can stand up to this critical examination at the hands of the "everyman" that information technology is now facilitating, then America will continue to be religious. If it can't, America will become more secular. Either way, reason (which is responsible for an incalculable amount of good in our society) will have won out. It will mean America has chosen what to trust wisely, and that will be a good thing.

  • Do Atheists Exist? A new “godless” church makes you wonder.

    12/28/2013 11:41:28 AM PST · 18 of 31
    BearArms to VanDeKoik
    They do not attack Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Taoists, Shintoists or ingeniousness religions.

    Have you heard of Sam Harris? He's probably the most renowned of the currently active anti-theist intellectuals. He regularly infuriates the left by attacking Islam, believing it to be a greater threat to women, reason, and modernity than Christianity.

    From his blog:

    I have long struggled to understand how smart, well-educated liberals can fail to perceive the unique dangers of Islam. In The End of Faith, I argued that such people don’t know what it’s like to really believe in God or Paradise—and hence imagine that no one else actually does. The symptoms of this blindness can be quite shocking. For instance, I once ran into the anthropologist Scott Atran after he had delivered one of his preening and delusional lectures on the origins of jihadist terrorism. According to Atran, people who decapitate journalists, filmmakers, and aid workers to cries of “Alahu akbar!” or blow themselves up in crowds of innocents are led to misbehave this way not because of their deeply held beliefs about jihad and martyrdom but because of their experience of male bonding in soccer clubs and barbershops.

    And this, commenting on a Youtube video of an ecstatic muslim prayer recitation concerning the hellfire that awaits us nonbelievers (Christian, Jew, Buddhist, and Atheist alike).

    This video has everything: the power of ritual and the power of the crowd; tears of devotion and a lust for vengeance. How many of the people in that mosque are jihadists? I have no idea—perhaps none. But their spiritual aspirations and deepest positive emotions—love, devotion, compassion, bliss, awe—are being focused through the lens of sectarian hatred and humiliation. Read every word of the translation so that you understand what these devout people are weeping over. Their ecstasy is inseparable from the desire to see nonbelievers punished in hellfire. Is this some weird distortion of the true teachings of Islam? No. This is a recitation from the Koran articulating its central message. The video has over 2 million views on YouTube. It was posted by someone who promised his fellow Muslims that they, too, would weep tears of devotion upon seeing it. The reciter is Sheikh Mishary bin Rashid Alafasy of Kuwait. He has as many Twitter followers as Jerry Seinfeld and J.K. Rowling (2 million). In doctrinal terms, this is not the fringe of Islam. It is the center.

    Islam marries religious ecstasy and sectarian hatred in a way that other religions do not. Secular liberals who worry more about “Islamophobia” than about the actual doctrine of Islam are guilty of a failure of empathy. They fail not just with respect to the experience of innocent Muslims who are treated like slaves and criminals by this religion, but with respect to the inner lives of its true believers. Most secular people cannot begin to imagine what a (truly) devout Muslim feels. They are blind to the range of experiences that would cause an otherwise intelligent and psychologically healthy person to say, “I will happily die for this.” Unless you have tasted religious ecstasy, you cannot understand the danger of its being pointed in the wrong direction.

  • Why Pro-Lifers Shouldn't Despair over Albuquerque

    11/20/2013 2:08:35 PM PST · 16 of 24
    BearArms to aimhigh
    What a strange article. It tells us to not be discouraged because failure is the norm when it comes to anti-abortion measures.

    It is quite remarkable how high the failure rate for anti-abortion ballot initiatives is. Even in very conservative states (like South Dakota, for instance), voters seem to reliably reject any serious restrictions on abortion at the ballot box. Just about the only pro-life initiatives that have achieved any success are those dealing with parental involvement for minors.

    From my observations of the last couple decades, I think it's clear that polling data isn't terribly accurate on this particular issue. While many Americans do continue to tell pollsters that they support restricting abortion, especially in later stages of pregnancy, not many of them actually vote for such restrictions when given the opportunity.

  • Celebrity bad science: Dried placenta pills and oxygen shots

    12/30/2012 4:23:27 PM PST · 28 of 33
    BearArms to EEGator
    They are tasty...

    Exactly what I meant! LOL

  • Celebrity bad science: Dried placenta pills and oxygen shots

    12/30/2012 2:23:21 PM PST · 3 of 33
    BearArms to Vince Ferrer

    Airheads...gotta love ‘em!

  • Piers Morgan Wants to Amend Moses

    12/28/2012 2:33:59 PM PST · 25 of 29
    BearArms to lurk
    Warren’s answers to Morgan were wrong all over. He doesn’t know his Bible.

    Judging from his comments on the Bible and slavery, I would definitely agree.

  • 'Gaza ceasefire gave Morsi green light for drastic action' (Just another terrorist dictator)

    11/23/2012 2:07:55 PM PST · 23 of 27
    BearArms to tobyhill

    The Arab Spring is about replacing relatively moderate Muslim dictators with radical Muslim dictators. Sure, some elections happen in the middle of the process, but that’s the way things inevitably end up. Those people are in a fundamentalist medieval phase and will be for some time. They are not, in the least bit, ready for democracy.

  • Romney says Ryan won't oppose abortion in rape cases (Romney supports both rape & incest abortion)

    08/22/2012 7:04:56 PM PDT · 287 of 291
    BearArms to Boogieman
    No, since that act is itself an act of killing, unless the child is old enough to survive outside the womb, and even then, it would be a crime to let the child die due to neglect.

    No, the act is simply intended to remove the being currently using the woman's organs. The fact that it will die without the woman's body is unfortunate, but is not something that she can remedy without enduring an unacceptably taxing, and traditionally unrequired, physiological burden. The fact that medical technology cannot help the embryo is not the woman's fault, and can therefore not be considered neglect.

    The conflict is pretty simple. The child has an inherent right to life, regardless of how it got here. The woman has rights as well, which she may be impeded from exercising while she is pregnant with the child.

    This may be your view, but that has not been the tradition of this country in any other area besides pregnancy by rape. I can think of no other case where someone is, or has been, compelled by the state to provide physiological life support to a being for which they have absolutely no responsibility.

    Just don’t kill the baby, since we are not allowed to go around killing people because we feel like it, or because they inconvenience us.

    We are allowed to kill people when they present a direct threat to us. A forced pregnancy, created entirely without any kind of invitation, is a particularly aggressive form of physical assault (one that lasts for 9 months and could cause the woman any number of health problems). The woman is more than justified, according to our traditions of personal liberty, to have the being effectuating the assault removed from her body.

    It’s about having your rights abridged in order to minimize the harm caused by the rights of two persons being in conflict.

    The woman, a person with rights who existed before the embryo, is in a state of being, essentially, assaulted by the embryo. Again, the law allows use of force in cases of self-defense. If that force ends up being lethal, one is still generally justified in using it, if it is necessary to stop the assault. So, I still fail to see how your position is consistent with our traditions regarding personal liberty and rights of self-defense.

  • Romney says Ryan won't oppose abortion in rape cases (Romney supports both rape & incest abortion)

    08/22/2012 3:52:14 PM PDT · 285 of 291
    BearArms to Boogieman
    As I said before, the person needing the transplant’s right to life isn’t interfered with in the least if they do not receive a new kidney, since they will simply continue to live out their natural lifespan unimpeded. Not providing someone with the means to extend their life is simply not equivalent to depriving them of their life.

    This implies that your objection is that the woman seeking the abortion is acting to kill the embryo. I would agree, she should not have the right to strictly kill it, but she has full right to remove it from her body, to stop it from using her womb against her will. If the embryo is simply removed from her womb intact and set aside to continue out its natural life for as long as it can, would this satisfy your concern?

    Another case that that is much more germaine to this situation would be Good Samaritan laws. The reason those laws are just is because in this conflict, the harm caused by obligating the Samaritan to try to help is usually quite minimal, while the harm caused to the party in distress if the Samaritan is not obligated to help can be extreme, to the point of death. Therefore, the proper resolution of the conflict is to say that the rights of the party in distress temporarily take precedence over the rights of the Samaritan.

    Yes, but Good Samaritan laws do not apply to the donation of bodily resources (blood, organs). Again, the state has generally respected the bodily integrity of the people. Giving blood can be a fairly simple process and be minimally inconvenient, but no one, that I'm aware, is required to give blood.

    Now, this doesn’t mean you must drive around looking for people to help; the laws only come into play when a situation arises that creates the conflict that it addresses. That is why your hypothetical “forced organ donation” scenario is ridiculous. There is no actual conflict between parties that would create a need for such a law to resolve the conflict. If I forcibly removed your kidney, then I would be infringing on your right to life, but simply not providing you with my kidney does no such thing.

    I have to say, I honestly do not see a legitimate conflict between the raped woman and the embryo. The woman, who existed first, was forcibly impregnated. The embryo is now using her organs to survive. How can the law require her to continue to allow the embryo to grow inside her, using her bodily resources and putting her body through the normal stresses and health complications that often accompany a full term pregnancy? This burden can, in no way, be seen as minimally inconvenient and is a clear violation of her bodily integrity.

    The reason I continue to bring up organ donation is that a law such as you propose would raise the bar so radically as to what innocent individuals in society should be expected to provide other individuals in need that it could conceivably affect all of us (and should, if we're to have a fair application of the principle). If a rape victim is required to help the embryo, why shouldn't you or I be required to help the kidney patient down the street? We're not responsible for his predicament, but the woman is certainly not responsible for that of the embryo either.

  • Romney says Ryan won't oppose abortion in rape cases (Romney supports both rape & incest abortion)

    08/22/2012 12:17:04 AM PDT · 265 of 291
    BearArms to Boogieman
    I am making an appeal to the inherent, natural rights that both parties in the dispute have claim to. They don’t derive these from society, so really, society has nothing to say in the matter of any importance. The society could be China, which places less value on the lives of children, or some society that places greater value on them, and the argument would still be exactly the same. Morality and justice don’t change depending on the standards or prevailing attitudes of the populace.

    When discussing what American law should be regarding this issue, it's important to consider the broader application of our society's traditional respect for the bodily integrity rights of its citizens. All I'm saying is that, in other areas of American law, the interest of protecting innocent life is routinely subjugated to other important interests, out of respect for personal liberty. A rape exception to an abortion ban is more than justifiable, in my opinion, when you take this into account.

    Now, if you wish to make the case that a raped woman has an obligation to save the embryo forcibly implanted in her womb anyway, you have to realize that there will be inevitable consequences to personal liberty generally, when the logic behind that argument is applied to other issues. I would expect that a country with such a law would be very close to mandating blood, marrow, and organ donation. After all, in a society where the protection of innocent life is the preeminent state interest, how could it be any other way?

  • Romney says Ryan won't oppose abortion in rape cases (Romney supports both rape & incest abortion)

    08/21/2012 8:50:06 PM PDT · 262 of 291
    BearArms to Boogieman
    In this case, there is no compromise possible, since the child cannot live unless the mother is restricted from exercising unfettered rights over her own body. One or the other party’s rights must be judged to take precedence over the other. That’s where the argument for the mother’s rights breaks down.

    You're making the assumption that the life of an innocent child is more precious to society than the bodily integrity of an innocent woman. I would argue that this is not true, since we don't have a history of forcing even parents of dying children to donate blood or organs to save their lives. You can certainly argue that it should be, but it has not been, traditionally.

  • Romney says Ryan won't oppose abortion in rape cases (Romney supports both rape & incest abortion)

    08/21/2012 7:32:14 PM PDT · 255 of 291
    BearArms to Boogieman
    Your analogy is flawed. Nobody is depriving the kidney patient of their life, or right to it, they will simply die in the natural course of events, barring some action that can’t be legally compelled of others.

    The principle here is that individuals in our society do not have an obligation to give of their bodily resources to help others survive, especially when they bear no responsibility whatsoever for the predicament of the person in trouble. This principle has been pretty consistently applied and respected in American law and tradition. It's the reason there is no forced organ or blood donation and women aren't forced to carry unused lab embryos to term.

    In the case of a rape pregnancy, it seems to me that the victimized woman seeking an abortion has a very strong case. She had nothing at all to do with the creation of the embryo she now carries, so shouldn't this principle apply to her? Isn't she justified in seeking to end the violation of her rights? The only way for her to cease the use of her body by the embryo is to have an abortion. The innocence of the baby is not relevant in this scenario, just as the innocence of unused embryos is not relevant to their situation.

  • Romney says Ryan won't oppose abortion in rape cases (Romney supports both rape & incest abortion)

    08/21/2012 4:56:57 PM PDT · 246 of 291
    BearArms to SoCalTransplant
    What do you say to her? Not what did Pat Buchannan say, or what does Kiessling say that candidates say, what do you say when you look her in the face to tell her that like it or not, she’s going to give birth? How do you tell a person something like that?

    Sadly, pro-lifers who don't support a rape exception almost never stop for even a moment to consider the fact that the victimized woman is also a person, and may also have important rights that should be weighed in the equation.

    After all, the right to life does not trump all other rights in law. If I need a kidney transplant to live, but there is no donor organ available, I will die...because I do not have the right to force you to give me a kidney against your will. My right to life does not trump your right to your bodily integrity, and that's a very good thing. I certainly wouldn't want to live in a country where the reverse was true.

  • Brutal: CNN Torches DWS on Medicare Falsehoods

    08/14/2012 1:51:40 AM PDT · 32 of 43
    BearArms to Kaslin

    Just WOW. Welcome back, CNN.

  • Obama Campaign Says Slashing Medicare An 'Achievement'

    08/12/2012 4:10:40 PM PDT · 11 of 11
    BearArms to Free ThinkerNY
    It is interesting that these Medicare cuts are happening only because a Democrat president proposed them. Sure, the Republicans would no doubt keep the cuts now that they've been passed, but if a Republican president had been the one to propose them initially, they would never have gone through, and everybody knows it.

    Ironically, the Democrats are the ones who made possible the "gutting" of Medicare that they, for so long, accused the Republicans of desiring. Politics sure is something, isn't it?

  • Red Dawn - Official Trailer (HD)

    08/10/2012 3:23:47 PM PDT · 26 of 52
    BearArms to Dallas59

    North Korea??? Uggghhhh.

  • Conservatives Backtrack on Long Prison Sentences

    07/26/2012 9:21:31 AM PDT · 8 of 8
    BearArms to Kaslin

    This is good to hear. The Prison State is very expensive for the taxpayers, and often inhumane to non-violent offenders. Moving those who are not dangerous out of the prison system makes more room for those who are truly dangerous. It’s common sense...don’t know why it took so long for people to realize it.

  • On PBS, Bill Moyers Trashes America and the NRA As 'Venomous...Enablers of Death'

    07/23/2012 8:15:34 AM PDT · 93 of 95
    BearArms to Kaslin

    Senseless boob alert.

  • So That This Never Happens Again

    07/23/2012 8:09:52 AM PDT · 8 of 29
    BearArms to servo1969

    Bloomberg...one of the most breathtakingly anti-liberty politicians of the modern era.

  • Denver shooting suspect's bomb could have "destroyed apartment complex": police

    07/21/2012 9:41:47 PM PDT · 6 of 19
    BearArms to Free ThinkerNY

    I think this calls for a Mythbusters episode.

  • New Film to Claim Jesus Was Born After Mary Was Raped By Roman Soldier

    06/25/2012 10:16:50 PM PDT · 48 of 49
    BearArms to UCANSEE2
    With Trayvon Martin as ‘Jesus’ and George Zimmerman as the ‘Roman Soldier’.

    LMAO!!

  • Bruce Willis calls Mitt Romney an 'embarrassment,' report says

    05/28/2012 6:02:17 PM PDT · 134 of 154
    BearArms to WilliamIII
    If we vote for a big government Republican just to vote against a liberal Democrat, all we're doing is helping the Republican Party move left. But worse than that, we're enabling the Republicans in their effort to enact their favored big govt programs. Look at GWB...his election allowed for the largest expansion of a federal entitlement in history. It would never have happened if a liberal Democrat had been in office (the "only Nixon could go to China" rule applies here).

    Big government Republican presidents put federal spending and fiscal irresponsibility on the fast track (I mean, it must be okay if a Republican is doing it, right??). I, for one, will have no part in it. If government is to grow without limit, let the Democrats be the party responsible for it.

  • Mitt Romney’s prep school classmates recall pranks, but also troubling incidents

    05/10/2012 3:22:00 PM PDT · 94 of 103
    BearArms to raulgomez05

    Oh, Romney was a bully prick in high school?? I’m shocked...just shocked.

  • Romney rejects Ron Paul-style austerity, will increase military spending

    05/10/2012 3:09:10 PM PDT · 45 of 45
    BearArms to Gennie
    Romney's a big government Republican, so this doesn't surprise me. Mindlessly growing the defense budget is not conservative, btw. We don't need a massive Cold War military right now, we need a lean, surgical force that can capably handle the threat of international terrorism and Islamic radicalism.

    The dollars we borrow to pay for unnecessary defense programs are just as expensive and difficult to pay back as the dollars we borrow to pay for the left's projects. And while just about everyone here honors the people who have worn the uniform, the military should never be used as a make-work program. We should spend what we need to spend on defense to protect this country, and not a penny more.

  • Vigorous’ Santorum crackdown may catch Internet porn viewers

    03/15/2012 6:39:19 PM PDT · 265 of 398
    BearArms to timlot
    In my opinion, social conservatism should be about trying to keep the left from using government power to destroy traditional values in this country, not about using government power to punish people who don't share or consistently practice those values.

    It's very unfortunate to see some conservatives so quick to want to use the boot of the state to solve a perceived problem in society. I've often lamented the fact that social conservatives almost always wish to use government as a weapon of first resort, which I don't believe is a philosophy consistent with respect for liberty.

  • Audio: Mark Levin Slams Ann Coulter for her Palin swipe

    03/15/2012 2:35:19 PM PDT · 11 of 128
    BearArms to onyx

    Lemme get this straight...Coulter insinuates that Palin is a charlatan for making extreme comments and building a following of fanatically devoted people to sell books and speeches to? Pot meet kettle...

  • THREE CHEERS FOR ROMNEYCARE! (Coulter Finally Officially Signs Ownership of Soul Over to Mittens)

    02/01/2012 5:48:04 PM PST · 55 of 141
    BearArms to KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle

    I blame the anorexia.

  • Dick Morris: How Mitt Romney suckered Gingrich in Florida

    02/01/2012 2:33:42 PM PST · 27 of 57
    BearArms to newgeezer

    The only way Romney can win elections is by totally demolishing and smearing an opponent who can’t answer back, and who has few establishment supporters to defend him. Obama is not going to be such an opponent. If the playing field is level, Romney will get crushed. Newt blew the Florida race in the debates..he should have kept attacking.

  • Romney Advisor: Putting the boot on the neck of Gingrich. Aiming to destroy Gingrich in FL for good.

    01/30/2012 1:59:53 AM PST · 151 of 154
    BearArms to Windy City Conservative

    Hope Romney understands that winning dirty has its consequences. Should be satisfying to watch that which goes around, come around in the fall.

  • Rev. Wildmon: Palin Is Right, Newt Being 'Crucified'

    01/29/2012 12:17:24 AM PST · 17 of 17
    BearArms to Diogenesis

    I have to say, I get strong sociopath vibes from this Romney feller.

  • Lunar Colonies and Mitt Romney's Incredible Smallness of Vision

    01/28/2012 3:46:41 AM PST · 5 of 117
    BearArms to Cincinatus' Wife

    Romney’s idea of “vision” is limited to office supply chains and sporting goods stores. How terrifically underwhelming.

  • Was Elliot Abrams Deceived on Newt?

    01/27/2012 3:34:40 PM PST · 27 of 27
    BearArms to Kaslin

    Deceived?? LMAO!!

  • Romney Advisor: No Obamacare Repeal

    01/26/2012 1:06:42 AM PST · 30 of 40
    BearArms to OPS4
    Let us pause, for a moment, and take this opportunity to sit and imagine what an unmitigated disaster a Romney presidency would be for this country. Big government Republican presidents are worse for America than liberal Democrat ones.
  • Gingrich Threatens to Skip Debates if Audiences Can’t Participate [another NY Slimes lie]

    01/24/2012 5:01:59 PM PST · 384 of 392
    BearArms to Bigtigermike

    Williams is a dingleberry...no surprise.

  • SC Primary - - Live Thread

    01/21/2012 9:34:57 PM PST · 2,316 of 2,411
    BearArms to rwfromkansas

    Let me tell you, my hat’s off to the SC conservatives for seeing through the whole Marianne crapola. Newt turned it on the media and the voters gave him an overnight boom that resulted in one of the greatest political comebacks I’ve ever seen in all my life. Well done, people...well done.

  • SC Primary - - Live Thread

    01/21/2012 6:15:43 PM PST · 1,930 of 2,411
    BearArms to tomkat

    A double-digit blowout...I’m so happy, I could wet myself!

  • SOUTH CAROLINA LATEST POLL: Gingrich 40%, Romney 26% (ARG Poll)

    01/21/2012 10:22:49 AM PST · 120 of 227
    BearArms to TBBT

    Bless you, Marianne!

  • Gingrich lead expands on final night (Newt up by 9)

    01/21/2012 10:08:30 AM PST · 48 of 56
    BearArms to Eurotwit

    The Newtron Boom is being confirmed in other polls.

  • Marianne Gingrich in ’95: "I don’t want [Newt] to be president, and I don’t think he should be"

    01/19/2012 12:01:59 PM PST · 13 of 56
    BearArms to montag813

    Exes say a lot of things...hopefully people will discount this.

  • South Carolina PPP Poll - Gingrich 34%, Romney 28%

    01/19/2012 10:50:35 AM PST · 31 of 80
    BearArms to Eurotwit

    We need to remember...this Marianne garbage is obviously a hit piece on Newt by the media to try and secure Romney’s nomination. Exes are often bitter and can say and make up a whole lot of malarkey. Don’t let them win, people, please.

  • South Carolina PPP Poll - Gingrich 34%, Romney 28%

    01/19/2012 10:38:20 AM PST · 19 of 80
    BearArms to Eurotwit

    Newtron Boom!

  • CNN/Time Poll: Race for South Carolina tightening

    01/18/2012 2:09:22 PM PST · 31 of 91
    BearArms to TBBT

    If Romney makes it to the nomination, it will be solely due to the divided conservative vote. Santorum is a fine candidate, but Newt is the obvious challenger to Romney. Hopefully people will figure that out before it’s too late.

  • Romney campaign tries to trip up Newt Gingrich before the do-or-die South Carolina primary

    01/18/2012 11:05:43 AM PST · 6 of 11
    BearArms to TBBT

    Willard’s rolling out the has-beens to try and prevent a Newtron Boom.

  • Newt owns Juan Williams For Race-baiting Question (4:31 min Video)

    01/16/2012 10:13:19 PM PST · 10 of 110
    BearArms to sheikdetailfeather

    One of the most awesome things I’ve ever seen in a presidential debate.

  • Go Quietly, Michael Steele (The priority for the RNC chairman is to get out of the headlines)

    04/06/2010 9:27:39 PM PDT · 32 of 33
    BearArms to SeekAndFind

    The man is very nice, but also very incompetent. He should go.

  • Atheist Bibles-For-Porn Swap Riles Campus

    03/03/2010 3:38:09 PM PST · 15 of 21
    BearArms to TaraP

    What’s wrong with porn, again?

  • Defense: Woman Believed Her NYC Gang-Rape Lie

    02/23/2010 4:31:45 PM PST · 24 of 36
    BearArms to nickcarraway

    This is an excellent example of why we need to have a humane prison system that combats the sick predation that goes on among the inmates. This innocent man was incarcerated with real criminals, God only knows what may have happened to him in there. Innocent people go to prison all the time (had the Duke lacrosse players not been from families who could afford decent legal representation, they might all very well be there right now).

  • Leaving Tiller to God

    02/05/2010 2:22:34 PM PST · 11 of 47
    BearArms to presidio9

    I appreciate his attempt to steer pro-lifers away from violence, but given that he’s based his argument on Romans 13, I wonder how the author would defend the American Revolution. Maybe he wouldn’t, I suppose.